Measuring Creativity for Innovation Management
AbstractIdentifying the extent and nature of the creativity of new products is a key for innovation management. The revised Creative Solution Diagnosis Scale (CSDS) is a 27-item scale based on a theoretical model of functional creativity, consisting of five main criteria: Relevance & Effectiveness, Problematization, Propulsion, Elegance and Genesis. The CSDS offers potential for differentiated assessments of product creativity as part of the larger process of innovation. Non-expert judges rated a series of mousetrap designs using a 30-item version of the CSDS. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed a simple structure that corresponded closely to the a priori theoretical model of functional creativity. The untrained judges were able to use the scale with a high degree of reliability and internal consistency. The scale offers a tool for managing innovation, especially for stimulating creativity and diagnosing the creativity of products.
ADAMS, R., Bessant, J. and Phelps, R. (2006). Innovation Management Measurement: A Review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 8(1), 21-47.
AMABILE, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York: Springer.
AMABILE, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to "The Social Psychology of Creativity." Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
BAER, J., Kaufman, J. C. and Gentile, C. A. (2004). Extension of the consensual assessment technique to nonparallel creative products. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 113-117.
BAGOZZI, R.P. (1980). Causal Modeling in Marketing. New York: Wiley & Sons.
BEGHETTO, R. A., Kaufman, J. C. and Baxter, J. (in press). Answering the unexpected questions: Student self-beliefs and teacher ratings of creativity in elementary math and science. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts.
BELL, I. A. (1992). Creativity, TV Commercial Popularity, and Advertising Expenditures. International Journal of Advertising, 11(2), 165-183.
BESEMER, S. P. and O'Quin, K. (1987). Creative product analysis: Testing a model by developing a judging instrument. In S. G. Isaksen (Ed.), Frontiers of creativity research: Beyond the basics (pp. 367-389). Buffalo, NY: Bearly.
BESEMER, S. P. and O'Quin, K. (1999). Confirming the three-factor Creative Product Analysis Matrix model in an American sample. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 287-296.
BLEDOW, R., Frese, M., Anderson, N., Erez, M. and Farr, J. (2009). A dialectic perspective on innovation: Conflicting demands, multiple pathways, and ambidexterity. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2, 305-337.
BOLLEN, K.A. (1989). Structural Equations with Latent Variables. New York, NY: Wiley & Sons.
CARNEVALE, A. P., Gainer, L. J. and Meltzer, A. (1990). Workplace basics: The essential skills employers want. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
CATTELL, J., Glascock, J. and Washburn, M. F. (1918). Experiments on a possible test of aesthetic judgment of pictures. American Journal of Psychology, 29, 333-336.
CHILD, I. L. and Iwao, S. (1968). Personality and esthetic sensitivity: Extension of findings to younger age and to different culture. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 308-312.
CHRISTENSEN, C. M. (1999). Innovation and the General Manager, Boston, MA: Irwin McGraw-Hill.
COMREY, A. L. and Lee, H. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
CRONBACH, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests, Psychometrica 16, 297-334.
CROPLEY, D. H. and Cropley, A. J. (2005). Engineering creativity: A systems concept of functional creativity. In J. C. Kaufman and J. Baer (Eds.), Creativity across domains: Faces of the muse (pp. 169-185). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
CROPLEY, D. H. and Cropley, A. J. (2008). Elements of a universal aesthetic of creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 2, 155-161.
CROPLEY, D. H. and Cropley, A. J. (2010a). Functional Creativity: Products and the generation of effective novelty. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Creativity (pp. 301-320). New York: Cambridge University Press.
CROPLEY, D. H. and Cropley, A. J. (2010b). Recognizing and fostering creativity in design education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 20, 345-358.
CROPLEY, D. H. and Kaufman, J. C. (in press). Measuring functional creativity: empirical validation of the Creative Solution Diagnosis Scale (CSDS). Journal of Creative Behavior.
DAVILA, T., Epstein, M. J. and Shelton, R. (2006). Making Innovation Work - How to Manage It, Measure It and Profit from It. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
DAVIS, M. A. (2009). Understanding the relationship between mood and creativity: A meta analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108, 25-38.
DILLON, T. A., Lee, R. K. and Matheson, D. (2005). Value innovation: Passport to wealth creation. Research-Technology Management, March-April: 22-36.
FLORIDA, R. (2002). The rise of the creative class and how it's transforming work, life, community and everyday life. New York: Basic Books.
FREEL, M. (2000). Barriers to product innovation in small manufacturing firms. International Small Business Journal, 18(3), 60-81.
GOLDENBERG, J. and Mazursky, D. (2002). Creativity in product innovation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
GRUDIN, R. (1990). The grace of great things: Creativity and innovation. New York: Ticknor and Fields.
GUPTA, A. K., Smith, K. G. and Shalley, C. E. (2006). The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 693-706.
HALLER, C. S., Courvoisier, D. S. and Cropley, D. H. (2010). Correlates of creativity among visual arts students. International Journal of Creativity and Problem-Solving, 20, 53-71.
HANER, U.-E. (2005). Spaces for creativity and innovation in two established organizations. Creativity and Innovation Management, 14, 288-298.
HAN, S. H., Yun, M. H., Kim, K. and Kwahk, J. (2000). Evaluation of product usability: Development and validation of usability dimensions and design elements based on empirical models. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 26, 477-488.
HEKKERT, P. and Van Wieringen, P. C. W. (1996). Beauty in the eye of expert and nonexpert beholders: A study in the appraisal of art. American Journal of Psychology, 109, 389-407.
HICKEY, M. (2001). An application of Amabile's Consensual Assessment Technique for rating the creativity of children's musical compositions. Journal of Research in Music Education, 49, 234-244.
HORN, D. and Salvendy, G. (2006). Consumer-based assessment of product creativity: A review and reappraisal. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 16, 155-175.
HORN, D. and Salvendy, G. (2009). Measuring consumer perception of product creativity: Impact on satisfaction and purchasability. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 19, 223-240.
JACKSON, P. W. and Messick, S. (1965). The person, the product, and the response: conceptual problems in the assessment of creativity. Journal of Personality, 33, 1122-1131.
KAUFMAN, J. C., Baer, J. and Cole, J. C. (2009). Expertise, Domains, and the Consensual Assessment Technique. Journal of Creative Behavior, 43(4), 223-233.
KAUFMAN, J. C., Baer, J., Cole, J. C. and Sexton, J. D. (2008). A comparison of expert and nonexpert raters using the Consensual Assessment Technique. Creativity Research Journal, 20, 171-178.
KAUFMAN, J. C., Plucker, J. A. and Baer, J. (2008). Essentials of creativity assessment. New York: Wiley.
KIM, W. C. and Mauborgne, R. (2004). Value innovation: The strategic logic of high growth. Harvard Business Review, July-August: 172-180.
LEE, S, Lee J. and Young, C-Y. (2005). A variation of CAT for measuring creativity in business products. Korean Journal of Thinking and Problem Solving, 15, 143-153.
McADAM, R. and Keogh, W. (2004). Transitioning Towards Creativity and Innovation Measurement in SMEs, Creativity and Innovation Management, 13(2), 126-139.
MANN, E. L. (2009). The search for mathematical creativity: Identifying creative potential in middle school students. Creativity Research Journal, 21, 338-348.
MILLER, A. I. (1992). Scientific creativity: A comparative study of Henri Poincaré and Albert Einstein. Creativity Research Journal, 5, 385-418.
MUMFORD, M. D., Baughman, W. A., Threlfall, K. V., Supinski, E. P. and Costanza, D. P. (1996). Process-based measures of creative problem-solving skills: I. Problem construction. Creativity Research Journal, 9, 63-76.
NORUSSIS, M. J. (1994). Professional Statistics, SPSS Inc. Chicago.
NUNNALLY, J. C. and Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
O'QUIN, K. and Besemer, S. P. (1999). Creative Products, In M. A. Runco and S. R. Pritzker (eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 413-422). Boston: Academic Press.
PLUCKER, J. A., Kaufman, J. C., Temple, J. S. and Qian, M. (2009). Do experts and novices evaluate movies the same way? Psychology and Marketing, 26, 470-478.
PUCCIO, G. J. and Cabra, J. F. (2010). Organizational creativity: A systems approach. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Creativity (pp. 145-173). New York: Cambridge University Press.
PUCCIO, G. J., Murdock, M. C. and Mance, M. (2007). Creative Leadership: Skills that Drive Change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
REITER-PALMON, R., Illies Young, M., Kobe, L., Buboltz, C. and Nimps, T. (2009). Creativity and domain specificity: The effect of task type of multiple indices on creative problem solving. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3, 73-80.
REIS, S. M. and Renzulli, J. S. (1991). The assessment of creative products in programs for gifted and talented students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35, 128-134.
ROBERTS, B. (1988). Managing invention and innovation. Research-Technology Management, 33, 1-19.
SAVRANSKY, S. D. (2000). Engineering of creativity. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
SHALLEY, C. E. (2002). How valid and useful is the integrative model for understanding work groups' creativity and innovation? Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51, 406-410.
SIMONTON, D. K. (2009).Varieties of (scientific) creativity: A hierarchical model of disposition, development, and achievement.PerspectivesonPsychologicalScience,4,441-452.
SLATER, B. H. (2006). Aesthetics. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/a/aestheti.htm#H2 [Accessed February 22, 2011].
STERNBERG, R. J., Kaufman, J. C. and Pretz, J. E. (2002). The creativity conundrum: A propulsion model of kinds of creative contributions. New York: Psychology Press.
STERNBERG, R. J., Kaufman, J. C. and Pretz, J. E. (2003). A propulsion model of creative leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 14, 455-473.
STERNBERG, R. J. (1999). A propulsion model of types of creative contributions, Review of General Psychology, 3, 83-100.
STONE-ROMERO, E. F. and Stone, D. L. (1997). Development of a multidimensional measure of perceived product quality. Journal of Quality Management, 2, 87-112.
TAYLOR, A. (1975). An emerging view of creative actions. In I. A. Taylor, & J. W. Getzels (Eds.), Perspectives in creativity (pp. 297-325). Chicago: Aldine.
TORRANCE, E. P. (1965). The Minnesota studies of creative thinking: Widening horizons in creativity. New York: Wiley.
WEST, M. A. (2002). Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51, 355-424.
WHITE, A. and Smith, B. L. (2001). Assessing Advertising Creativity Using the Creative Product Semantic Scale. Journal of Advertising Research, 41(6), 27-34.
WOODMAN, R. W., Sawyer, J. E. and Griffin, R. W. (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity, Academy of Management Review, 18, 293-321. Appendix One
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).